December, 07 2020, 11:00pm EDT
More Than 15 Civil Rights Groups Call on Consumer Reports, Cnet, Tom's Guide and Other Tech Review Sites to Suspend Their Recommendation of Amazon Ring Cameras
WASHINGTON
Today, a coalition of 15+ consumer, privacy, and civil rights organizations launched a new campaign, RescindRing.com. Led by Fight for the Future, Rescind Ring calls on tech reviews to rescind or suspend their recommendation of Amazon Ring doorbell cameras.
The groups--including Fight for the Future, Action Center on Race and The Economy (ACRE), Constitutional Alliance, Demand Progress, Institute for Local Self-Reliance, Kairos Action, Media Alliance, MediaJustice, MPower Change, New York Communities For Change, Oakland Privacy, Open Media and Information Companies Initiative (Open MIC), S.T.O.P. - The Surveillance Technology Oversight Project, Secure Justice, Surveillance Technology Oversight Project (STOP), and United Church of Christ, OC Inc.--argue product reviewers need to consider the overall impact of a product on society at large in addition to the value to consumers in their assessment.
Amazon Ring cameras threaten both society and consumers. Their poor security leaves consumers vulnerable to hacks and leaks as seen in the past year. Their police partnerships challenge fundamental basic liberties, violate sacred privacy rights, and along with Neighbors App--foster racial profiling and increased criminalization of Black and brown people. This racist targeting is especially worrisome when coupled with the fact that roughly half of the police departments partnered with Amazon "are responsible for over a third of fatal police encounters nationwide."
And recently some Ring doorbell cameras caught fire, prompting Amazon to recall over 350,000 doorbell cameras. This is the latest example of the tech giant moving too quickly, and being reckless with security and safety, in order to flood our communities with cameras.
The detrimental result of Ring devices and partnerships on families, communities, and democracy renders them too unsafe for recommendation.
"Tech blogs can't say 'Black Lives Matter' and then give five star ratings to products that exacerbate racism. Amazon Ring cameras are dangerous, not just for the people who buy them, but for their neighbors, their communities, and society as a whole," said Evan Greer (she/her) deputy director of Fight for the Future, "Amazon's monopoly power and aggressive pursuit of surveillance partnerships with police set them apart from their competitors. Ignoring the broader societal impact of a product does not make your review 'neutral,' it makes it reckless and incomplete. Product review sites would not recommend, for example, stalkerware apps used by abusers to track their spouses. They shouldn't recommend harmful products like Ring, either."
Ken Mickles, Chief Technical Officer at Fight for the Future, added "Beyond the obvious privacy issues, Ring has a terrible track record when it comes to security even for the users who buy them. High profile incidents where Ring cameras were hacked and used to spy on children forced the company to make some improvements, but from a technical perspective it's just a bad idea to fill your home with internet-connected devices capable of constantly watching and listening. I'd never trust one of these devices on my front door or around my kids. Review sites are putting their credibility at risk by continuing to recommend these products. Oh, and also they sometimes catch fire?"
The campaign targets CNET, Consumer Reports, Gizmodo, Tom's Guide, TechRadar, and Digital Trends for best in category Ring recommendations made in the past year. Wirecutter, another target, suspended their Ring review last December but are in the process of reviewing the camera for a possible reversal of suspension. The groups plan to mobilize thousands of supporters to get these sites to rescind their endorsement and update relevant guides before the holidays.
Greer continues, "we know these recommendations play a critical role in purchasing decisions people make during the holidays. It's important reviewers uphold their commitment to consumers and the trust the public puts in their endorsements by withdrawing or suspending their Ring recommendation. Honestly, this should have happened already. Over the summer a man was killed by sheriffs in a Ring related incident. How many people have to be jailed or killed before tech reviewers realize Ring is not safe for anyone."
Fight for the Future is a group of artists, engineers, activists, and technologists who have been behind the largest online protests in human history, channeling Internet outrage into political power to win public interest victories previously thought to be impossible. We fight for a future where technology liberates -- not oppresses -- us.
(508) 368-3026LATEST NEWS
'There Will Be Many More': Citing GOP Medicaid Cuts, Rural Nebraska Clinic Announces Closure
"Republicans haven't passed their bill yet, but if you live in Nebraska you can thank them for making you less healthy," wrote Rep. Sean Casten (D-Ill.).
Jul 03, 2025
The devastating cuts to Medicaid contained in Republicans' budget bill have not yet gone into effect but are already having negative consequences for American healthcare.
Nebraska Public Media reports Thursday that the Curtis Medical Center, a clinic located in a rural Nebraska community with a population of under 1,000 residents, will soon shut down thanks in part to the expected impact the GOP's cuts to Medicaid will have on its finances.
Troy Bruntz, the president and CEO of Curtis Medical Center owner Community Hospital, said in a news release that the coming Medicaid cuts are tipping many financially challenged health clinics into insolvency.
"The current financial environment, driven by anticipated federal budget cuts to Medicaid, has made it impossible for us to continue operating all of our services, many of which have faced significant financial challenges for years," he explained.
Nebraska Public Media notes that the Curtis clinic is likely just the first domino in the state's rural healthcare system to fall thanks to the Medicaid cuts and it speaks to recent warnings from people like Jed Hansen, executive director for the Nebraska Rural Health Association, about how many other hospitals are in real danger.
"We currently have six hospitals that that we feel are in a critical financial state, three that are in an impending kind of closure or conversion over to the rural emergency hospital model," Hansen said earlier this week during an online forum about the state's crisis. "We would likely see the closures within a year to two years of once [the Medicaid cuts are] fully enacted."
Other experts have sounded similar alarms on the budget bill's impact on rural hospitals. Sharon Parrott, a senior fellow at the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities (CBPP), wrote earlier this week that Senate Republicans' efforts to create a fund of money earmarked for rural hospitals would prove woefully inadequate to the problems these institutions will face in the coming years.
"Senate Republicans know the bill would hurt rural hospitals—that's why they added a face-saving temporary fund, but it won't rescue rural providers when the funding runs dry and the permanent cuts to Medicaid and Affordable Care Act (ACA) marketplace coverage remain," explained Parrott. "This is particularly true because the revised Senate fund gives the Health and Human Services secretary significant discretion in how the funds would be allocated. Rural providers need people in their communities to have health coverage they can count on. Without that, more rural hospitals will close and more people with and without coverage will be cut off from care they need."
In an analysis released last month, the American Hospital Association (AHA) estimated that 1.8 million individuals in rural communities would lose their Medicaid coverage under the Republican Party's plan while rural hospitals would receive $50.4 billion less in Medicaid funds over the next decade, putting many of them at severe risk of shutting down completely.
"The Medicaid cuts in the One Big Beautiful Bill Act would devastate rural hospitals across the country" if the bill became law, warned AHA president and CEO Rick Pollack. "Many rural hospitals would be forced to choose between maintaining services, keeping staff and possibly closing their doors. Patients would be forced to travel hours for basic or emergency care, and communities would suffer."
Rep. Sean Casten (D-Ill.) cited the story about the Nebraska clinic on X Thursday morning and predicted it was just the beginning of bad things to come for rural hospitals.
"Republicans haven't passed their bill yet, but if you live in... Nebraska you can thank them for making you less healthy," he wrote. "There will be many more."
The Congressional Budget Office has estimated that the GOP budget bill would slash spending on Medicaid and the Children's Health Insurance Program by more than $1 trillion over a ten-year-period and would result in more than 10 million Americans losing their health insurance coverage.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Trump White House Lies About Budget Bill's Tax Cuts as US Public Opposes Giveaway to Rich
White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt misleadingly touted tax deductions for overtime and tips—while neglecting to mention the bill's much larger tax breaks for the wealthiest Americans and large corporations.
Jul 03, 2025
As the Republican reconciliation bill barrels toward final passage in Congress, the Trump White House is misrepresenting the measure's tax provisions in an attempt to paint the unpopular legislation as a boon for workers and ordinary seniors rather than a massive handout to the wealthiest Americans.
In an X post late Wednesday, White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt declared that any lawmaker who opposes the 887-page bill is voting against "no tax on tips," "no tax on overtime," and "no tax on Social Security" benefits.
Leavitt's post was sufficiently misleading as to draw a "community note" on the Elon Musk-owned platform, which clarified that the Republican bill "does not fully eliminate taxes on tips, overtime, or Social Security as claimed; it offers limited deductions with caps (e.g., $25,000 for tips, $12,500 for overtime) and excludes high earners, with no provision to remove taxes on Social Security."
As Axios reported Thursday, the Republican legislation does include "an increased tax deduction for tax filers age 64 and older," but the benefit "leaves out the poorest seniors" and expires in 2028, when President Donald Trump is set to leave office.
The tax deductions for overtime and tips also expire in 2028.
That's unlike the major tax breaks for the wealthy that are included in the legislation, which extends soon-to-expire provisions of the 2017 Trump-GOP tax law. For example, the new Republican bill would permanently raise the estate tax exemption, allowing ultrawealthy individuals and married couples to give their heirs up to $15 million or $30 million without paying any federal taxes.
"A married couple worth $30 million where both spouses die in 2026 would pay some $6 million less under the bill compared with current law," The Wall Street Journal observed.
Brendan Duke, senior director for federal budget policy at the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, estimates that the GOP reconciliation bill's tax breaks for the richest 1% are roughly 10 times larger than the tax deductions for tips and overtime combined.
You left something out. https://t.co/LwMFX2nbyM pic.twitter.com/9Dn2FoBZNH
— Brendan Duke (@Brendan_Duke) July 3, 2025
The Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy (ITEP) noted in a recent analysis that the Senate-passed legislation also "includes permanent corporate tax breaks (involving more generous versions of tax rules for bonus depreciation, research, and limits on interest deductions) that lawmakers have attempted to enact in recent years."
Contrary to the Trump White House's characterization of the reconciliation bill as a historic "middle- and working-class tax cut," ITEP found that "the richest 1% of Americans would receive a total of $117 billion in net tax cuts in 2026."
By contrast, according to ITEP, "the middle 20% of taxpayers on the income scale, a group that has 20 times the number of taxpayers as the richest 1%, would receive less than half that much, $53 billion in net tax cuts that year."
"The effects of President Trump's tariff policies alone offset most of the tax cuts for the bottom 80% of Americans," the group added. "For the bottom 40% of Americans, the tariffs impose a cost that is greater than the tax cuts they would receive under this legislation."
Survey data released Wednesday by Data for Progress shows that the Republican legislation is unpopular with a majority of likely U.S. voters. The new poll, conducted between June 27 and July 1, found that 62% of Americans are either somewhat or very concerned about the bill's "cuts to income taxes on wealthy Americans."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Abrego Garcia’s Attorneys Say He Faced Beatings and ‘Psychological Torture’ in El Salvador Prison
While the prisoners were kneeling, guards allegedly kept watch over them and would physically strike anyone who fell over from exhaustion, allege attorneys representing Abrego Garcia.
Jul 03, 2025
Attorneys representing Kilmar Abrego Garcia, an immigrant whom the Trump administration wrongly sent to El Salvador's infamous Terrorism Confinement Center (CECOT), are alleging that he and other detainees at the site were subjected to physical abuse and psychological torture.
In a court filing published on Wednesday evening, Abrego Garcia's attorneys write that their client "was subjected to severe mistreatment upon arrival at CECOT, including but not limited to severe beatings, severe sleep deprivation, inadequate nutrition, and psychological torture."
The filing describes Abrego Garcia and approximately 20 other inmates "being struck with wooden batons" after arriving at the facility as they were frogmarched to their cell, where guards would subsequently force them to kneel from 9:00 pm until 6:00 am While the prisoners were kneeling, guards allegedly kept watch over them and would physically strike anyone who fell over from exhaustion. The complaint adds that "during this time... Abrego Garcia was denied bathroom access and soiled himself."
The complaint alleges officials at the prison would repeatedly threaten to transfer Abrego Garcia to cells that contained gang members who would "tear" him apart. These threats were made more menacing, the attorneys state, because "Abrego Garcia repeatedly observed prisoners in nearby cells who he understood to be gang members violently harm each other with no intervention from guards or personnel. Screams from nearby cells would similarly ring out throughout the night without any response from prison guards on personnel."
During Abrego Garcia's first two weeks at the facility, the attorneys write, he lost approximately 31 pounds.
The Trump administration last month complied with a Supreme Court order to facilitate Abrego Garcia's return to United States after it acknowledged months earlier that he had been improperly deported to El Salvador. Upon his return, the United States Department of Justice promptly hit him with human smuggling charges to which he has pleaded not guilty.
President Donald Trump and Attorney General Pam Bondi have also accused Abrego Garcia of being a member of the gang MS-13, although they have produced no evidence to back up that assertion.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular